Bulent Aliev wrote:

Subject: [c-a] Alternate Fuel/Engines

From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
To: Canard mail list <canard-aviators@canard.com>

[The Canard Aviators's Mailing list]

I attended 2 interesting seminars at OSH on this subject, one called
"The Demise of 100LL", the other by Lycoming (can't remember what it was
called) on engines in general and I asked a question about alternate
engines which got an interesting response.

100LL fuel is on life support.  It is just a matter of time until the
EPA regulates it out of existence.  The one reason it hasn't been done
away with yet is the existence of a council of industry representatives
who are charged with coming up with a alternative fuel, and priorities
within the EPA. (they have bigger fish to pursue at present)  To date,
after some 5 years of work, there is no alternate fuel on the horizon
for 100LL.

The Lycoming representative said all parallel valve engines in there
line could live with existing auto fuel.  All high compression engines
obviously are on life support as is 100LL.  When asked if there was any
research going on with regard to alternate engines, he said yes,
sighting the Continental effort and their own research which is on
going. (Incidentally, the Continental engine is flying on a Skymaster.
They could not get the 40 hours flown off in time to attend OSH..so it
was said)

The big, big problem with an alternate engine are the airplane
manufacturers.  They will not sign on to a new engine while it is legal
to use what is on the market today, damn the future.  Lycoming tried to
get a commitment and not one manufacturer would participate.  The
airplane manufacturers will not act until it is mandated by the
government.  Without question, the technology is available to produce
what John Slade and Phil Johnson are attempting, but there is no market
for it so long as airplane manufactures are not on the band wagon.

What will happen, since it does not seem feasible to come up with an
alternative fuel, is that alternative engines with be mandated.  And
that is going to cost big bucks with all the high compression piston
jobs on existing aircraft.  What kind of alternative engines will we
see?  Probably diesel (or small turbine) if the oil companies have any
say in the matter.  It will be very expensive and difficult to produce
98-100 octane fuel without lead in it and the market will be smaller
than it is now if any diesel engines are certified.

Maybe Cessna was thinking along those lines when they derated the 0360
to 160 hp in the 172.  It certainly will run no lead auto gas.  The rest
of us will be doing likewise when the hammer falls.  The 200 hp Lycoming
may well be endangered when all this happens unless it is derated also.

dd

What are they going to do about the ten of thousands of engines out there
that require 100LL? There will be a political backlash against the EPA you will
not believe. It is unconstitutional to deprive one of his property
without due process. 

BTW I have decided to start a Car Owners Association here in CA to 
rein in the DMV and the CARB. We will use the ballot proposition mechanism
here in CA to accomplish a few small goals, one at a time.

On the short list is requiring the car manufacturers to provide
a three digit code on the instrument panel for the OBD II 256 different
check engine light faults. Currently car owners are kept in the dark.

Another is progressively raising the year, starting with 1973, which
an old car is exempt from smog rules one year at a time. 

A third is eliminating collecting sales tax on cars each time they 
are resold as used cars. The tax collected can exceed the original cost
of the car in short order.

Etc., etc.

Political organizations such as this appear to be the only way
to control such government nonsense.

Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org